Just re-reading an old 1954 Trains magazine that had an article on the B&O Museum, then not open for quite a year.

One photo shows CNJ 4-4-2 592 being prepared by the CNJ for exhibit, actually looking like more of an overhaul. All wheels were removed and smokebox open, with tubes missing and part of the front tube sheet cut out. Just curious, how far did these repairs go, and does the locomotive have tubes in it today?

Also, it noted that EA diesel 51 was already retired to the museum, in the stall directly across from the turntable lead, as it was too long to be turned into another stall. It stated that some electrical and truck parts had been removed for the construction of an E8 bearing the same number. Again, just curious, what is left inside the carbody of the old 51? Does it retain the original Winton V-12s?

bobyar2001@yahoo.com

> One photo shows CNJ 4-4-2 592 being prepared
> by the CNJ for exhibit, actually looking
> like more of an overhaul. ...Just curious, how far did these repairs
> go, and does the locomotive have tubes in it
> today?

> Also, it noted that EA diesel 51 was already
> retired to the museum, Again, just
> curious, what is left inside the carbody of
> the old 51? Does it retain the original
> Winton V-12s?

Can't speak for 592, but in my time volunteering there I never heard anyone suggest that it didn't have tubes in, and can't see any reason why it wouldn't. Maybe Ken Gillespie can go peer in the firebox with a flashlight and tell us.

AFAIK, 51 is an empty carbody on a frame--no Wintons or much of anything else left in there.

eledbetter@rypn.org

> Can't speak for 592, but in my time
> volunteering there I never heard anyone
> suggest that it didn't have tubes in, and
> can't see any reason why it wouldn't. Maybe
> Ken Gillespie can go peer in the firebox
> with a flashlight and tell us.

I haven't peered into the firebox, but I was told that the tubes have been removed.

> AFAIK, 51 is an empty carbody on a frame--no
> Wintons or much of anything else left in
> there.

I HAVE been inside 51, and the Winton's ARE still there, although they froze up during all those years outdoors, so she is not a likely candidate for an operational restoration.


kevingillespie@usa.net

It was my understanding that the front tube sheet and the boiler tubes were removed by the CNJ before the engine's donation to the B&O Museum. I believe this was mentioned in one of Don Wood's books.

> I haven't peered into the firebox, but I was
> told that the tubes have been removed.

> I HAVE been inside 51, and the Winton's ARE
> still there, although they froze up during
> all those years outdoors, so she is not a
> likely candidate for an operational
> restoration.

I have actually been inside the boiler of the 592, and can confirm that the boiler tubes and front tube sheet are definitely gone. The riveted flange remains at the front, so the late UP style welded in tube sheet could be attmpted, if needed. We had some idle chit-chat a few years ago about forming a "Friends" type group for this loco, but as a well known professional steam guy remarked to me, there aint no railroad with any brains going to let you operate a loco that can wipe out the crew with one broken siderod, or that the engineer cant get out of the way if he passes a shifted load of lumber on a freight train.

Steve

PS, Now a "Friends" type group for the first USRA 2-8-2 ever, now that would also be something. . . .

> Just re-reading an old 1954 Trains magazine
> that had an article on the B&O Museum,
> then not open for quite a year.

> One photo shows CNJ 4-4-2 592 being prepared
> by the CNJ for exhibit, actually looking
> like more of an overhaul. All wheels were
> removed and smokebox open, with tubes
> missing and part of the front tube sheet cut
> out. Just curious, how far did these repairs
> go, and does the locomotive have tubes in it
> today?

> Also, it noted that EA diesel 51 was already
> retired to the museum, in the stall directly
> across from the turntable lead, as it was
> too long to be turned into another stall. It
> stated that some electrical and truck parts
> had been removed for the construction of an
> E8 bearing the same number. Again, just
> curious, what is left inside the carbody of
> the old 51? Does it retain the original
> Winton V-12s?


SZuidervee@aol.com

Thanks! I stand corrected and gratefully so!

eledbetter@rypn.org

> ...a well known professional
> steam guy remarked to me, there aint no
> railroad with any brains going to let you
> operate a loco that can wipe out the crew
> with one broken siderod, or that the
> engineer cant get out of the way if he
> passes a shifted load of lumber on a freight
> train...

Were the camelbacks actually more lethal than a locomotive with its cab behind the firebox? Even a loco such as a 4-4-0 or 4-6-0, without a trailing truck, can have the problem of removing one of the crew seats with a broken rod. Did camelbacks have ther cabs built stronger as a precaution?

tmanz@afo.net

A deckless end-cab engine would have the side rod below the cab, but not the main rod. The main rod is usually right below the cab on a Camelback.

Both injectors are in the engineer's cab. Also, in a derailment, Camelbacks could roll on the engineer with no means of escape but most dangerous the engineer is alone in his cab with no dead man pedal or Alertor. The fireman is either on the tender apron or in the cab on the other side of the boiler; The head brakeman is in the other cab (or on the pilot beam). There is no one to call signals or stop the train if the engineer is disabled.

Backing a camelback the engineer often sits "up on the cab" by sitting on the arm rest. It's the only way to see around the firebox.

The ICC wanted the roads out of the camelback business since the 1930's but the Depression and WWII prevented that. The CNJ was also financially broke. RDG got out of road Camelbacks by the end of 1948 (part of the reason the G-3 4-6-2's were built) but CNJ couldn't afford to do so until the diesels came in.

The Electric City Trolley Museum Association